Judith on 27/3/2009 at 12:48
Kolya - on the other hand, if the "American" point of view can be described as: "there are no proofs and facts, it's the personal opinion that really matters", then it's the anti-rationalism ;)
BR - and you seem to pass judgment on others after reading one post. What a snobbish way of seeing people.
I'm just saying that the more knowledge you have on a certain topic, the better, you can't deny that. Of course, you can be talented, you can have brilliant ideas in your head, but you won't invent the whole history of human activities on your own, that's obvious. And if you read about it/learn it, it only helps you in expanding your abilities. What's the point in denying that?
I may understand that you think the university folks are, in general, a bunch of elitist pricks, putting themselves airs (not far from truth, unfortunately), but you can always try to study on your own, or at least search for the knowledge at the popular science level.
Besides you can't deny that certain (a lot of) human works require some knowledge to get the references to certain ideas, other works etc. It's like trying to read books by Derrida or Popper without any knowledge of the history of philosophy - it's a waste of your time (some may say it's a waste of time anyway ;)). The same applies to any kind of artistic human activity. You don't have to earn yourself a university degree, but still, the more you know, the better.
Rogue Keeper on 27/3/2009 at 13:02
Quote Posted by Judith
BR - and you seem to pass judgment on others after reading one post. What a snobbish way of seeing people.
I'm not responsible for you not expanding what you had on your mind in the first place.
Your original statement "I don't know why people think they're able to judge art without any knowledge about it. The more you know, the better, and less chance of making a fool of yourself." sounded very snobbish. You were basically rejecting ability of others to judge paintings according to their personal aesthetic standards and experiences, because apparently who wasn't studying an artistic movement deeply, isn't qualified to make personal aesthetic judgements. Raph merely stated his aesthetic point of view and you inappropriately whacked him from your apparently superior academic position.
What follows is a good expansion, why didn't you make it in the first place and risked making a snobbish fool of yourself?
Judith on 27/3/2009 at 13:12
And I'm not responsible for what happens in your mind. And it happens too much, when compared to actual text/context. If you're trying to pick a fight, find someone else. Besides, if you're trying to be picky about the meaning of my sentences, how can anything written in the forums "sound"? :)
Judith on 27/3/2009 at 13:14
:laff: :thumb:
Oh I forgot, if my "any knowledge" equals: "basically rejecting ability of others to judge paintings according to their personal aesthetic standards and experiences, because apparently who wasn't studying an artistic movement deeply, isn't qualified to make personal aesthetic judgements"
then something is very, very wrong here.
Rogue Keeper on 27/3/2009 at 13:22
General Notice : Judith's written statements can't remotely encompass the true meaning of numerous dialectic processes going on in his multi-dimmensional artistic mind. Please handle with care.
Judith on 27/3/2009 at 13:38
And who you are to judge that, if I may ask? You don't know me, I don't know you, and in terms of communication, you're not even a native English speaker, neither am I. At least I'm not wasting my time writing those overblown interpretations or some "cheap-psychology" remarks. I'm just wasting my time writing this. Teh internets, serious business :)
Rogue Keeper on 27/3/2009 at 13:53
Personality assessment in progress, please continue.
Stitch on 27/3/2009 at 14:38
You ought to turn that program inward, champ.
On topic: I think Kolya has nailed the paintings in the original post the best, albeit in an unnecessarily dismissive fashion. The paintings are nothing more than displays of virtuosic skill, which can be impressive in its own right but ultimately don't result in much more than a "wow look what that guy did." Nothing inherently wrong with that, but the paintings ultimately do nothing to expand the form, make a statement, or express personal truths.
Having said that, "PFFFTT BORING" is a pretty shallow critique.
Kolya on 27/3/2009 at 15:06
You're mistaking a shorthand for shallowness.
